you better get busy then! :)

what does the constitution have to do with any marriage?

Exactly.

lol
i was being facetious. i suggest that you go re-read it. the day the govt started giving rights to married couples, they opened this can of beans. you can't give rights to some, and not to others-THAT is what is unconstitutional. a lot of specific institutions aren't specifically mentioned-but it is specifically stated that all men (and presumably, women) are created equal.

The same thing gay marriage has to do with Islam.

:rolleyes:

most threads cover more ground than the initial post was mean to do. what's the big deal that this thread, like so many others, went off on a tangent?

No big deal! I've always felt I was a lesbian trapped in a man's body so I can relate. Also have had a Muslim cab driver or two in my day and let's not forget my donut man and the ever famous 'Piranha Man'. It all fits now.

and for those who never met Piranha Man here's a video blessing

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&gl=us

I hate to say it,but all MEN weren't created equal in the eyes of the constitution. Black men were 1/5 or 2/5 of a white man so I doubt if women or gays were exactly equal either. I'm not saying I agree with it. I think it should go to the states. Vermont did it the right way. I personally don't care. My right to own a firearm is spelled out in the constitution(tangent!). Where is marriage between a man and woman mentioned in the constitution? Next to the right to get a mortgage for a home I can't afford?

so, since back in the late 1700's they decided all men weren't equal (which has since been remedied, i recall a civil war as well as a couple of amendments to the constitution regarding voting, desegregation) altho they wrote they were, we're supposed to continue to follow that?

you can't pick and choose which rights to convey-you just mentioned your right to bear arms. some don't want you to have that right. so, like them, do you want to cherry pick which ones should be given, which aren't? after all, that might just jump up and bite you in the bite regarding your guns.

take note of my signature regarding majority rule.

:{>: :tro: :{>: :{>: I've never used the hearts, but when you write something with that much function (and such poor form,) then you get my trophy of love.

Wouldn't be surpised if they came up with that way of cross-sectioning a skull.

:{> back atchya , at least we agree on one thing , Muslims and my lack of writing skills.

^^

thats two things

i think logical people know better than to lump an entire group of people into a category because of the actions of a few.

Don't be so certain, Deb! :D

I think its more than a few , a few is three , its more than three.

Hey Now.
You are the one that cant count.
Dont you go defining a few.

so, more than three means it's all of them?

Just seems that way.

People have said I seem silly, junvenile
and in no way funny, just irritating.
Does that make it true?

That was meant as a rhetorical question,
no answer required.